Minutes - Planning Board - 3/19/2009
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD ACTION MINUTES
March 19, 2009
1777 Broadway, Council Chambers
A permanent set of these minutes and a tape recording (maintained for a period of seven years)
are retained in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). Minutes and streaming audio are also
available on the web at: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
KC Becker
Bill Holicky
Elise Jones
Willa Johnson
Phil Shull, Chair
Adrian Sopher
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT:
Andrew Shoemaker
STAFF PRESENT:
Jeff Arthur, Engineering Review Manager
Katie Knapp, Civil Engineer II
David Gehr, Assistant City Attorney
Beverly Johnson, Planner II
Julie Johnston, Senior Planner
Ruth McHeyser, Executive Director of Community Planning
Susan Richstone, Long Range Planning Manager
Jessica Vaughn, Planner I
Paula Weber, Administrative Specialist III
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair, P. Shull, declared a quorum at 6:07 p.m. and the following business was
conducted:
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On a motion by E. Jones, seconded by A. Sopher, the Planning Board approved (6-0, A.
Shoemaker absent) the Dec. 4, 2008 Planning Board minutes as amended.
On a motion by E. Jones, seconded by B. Holicky, the Planning Board approved (6-0, A.
Shoemaker absent) the Jan. 8, 2009 Planning Board minutes as amended.
On a motion by K. Becker, seconded by W. Johnson , the Planning Board approved (6-0, A.
Shoemaker absent) the Feb. 19, 2009 Planning Board minutes as amended.
On a motion by B. Holicky, seconded by A. Sopher, the Planning Board approved (6-0, A.
Shoemaker absent) the Jan. 26, 2009 Planning Board minutes as amended.
1
On a motion by E. Jones , seconded by P. Shull, the Planning Board approved ( 6-0, A.
Shoemaker absent) the March 5, 2009 Planning Board minutes as amended.
3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
No one from the public addressed the board.
4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS
Call-up items:
1535 Spruce, B. Holicky recused himself from this item for call-up. The item was not
called up.
1710 Sunset Blvd., This item was not called up.
4850 Sterling Dr., information item only, no call-up.
5. ACTION ITEMS
A. Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to City Council on an
ordinance amending Title 9, B.R.C. 1981, "Wetlands Protection."
Staff Presentation
S. Richstone and B. Johnson presented the item to the board.
Public Hearing
Gail Gordon, 377 West Arapahoe Lane, Boulder, CO spoke in support of the wetland but with a
grandfathering provision.
Patty Angerer, Boulder, CO spoke to the wording of the ordinance, and asked for more specific
guidelines.
David Crumpacker, Boulder, CO spoke in support of the comment made by Gail Gordon and
was concerned about not having a grandfather provision.
Motion
On a motion by B. Holicky, seconded by E. Jones, the Planning Board recommended (6-0, A.
Shoemaker absent) to City Council adoption of the ordinance amending Section 9-3-9, Wetland
Protection, B.R. C. 1981, incorporating the staff memorandum dated March 19, 2009 subject to
the following conditions of approval:
1. Omit "if they do not reduce the extent of a stream, wetland or water body" in paragraph
(e)(4)
2. Include the "removal of vegetative debris and trash in the stream channel" in list of
exemptions under (e)(4).
3. Change the language in (m)(7) to be more similar to that in (o)(3)(B)
4. Change the application requirement in 9-3-9(p)(3)(D) from "all landowners" to either
75% of all landowners or landowners of 75% of the land area. (Staff will finalize
a proposal on this for council.)
5. Change the exemption for application of herbicide or pesticides in (e)(4)(N) to exempt
pesticide application in the buffer but only exempt application in the wetland or
stream if the city's IPM procedure (or similar process) has been followed.
2
6. Change the text under (s)(1) to read: "Unless otherwise specified, a stream, wetland or
water body permit expires three years after the date of final approval."
B. Update on the RH-2 zone district project.
Staff Presentation
R. McHeyser, J. Johnston and J. Vaughn presented the item to the board.
Public Hearing
Carol Affleck, P.O. Box 534, RE: 1511 Grove - 15'x' St. Business Corridor as it relates to
transition to RH-2. Would like the option of a business line adjustment to include her lot.
Board Discussion
The following was discussed by the board?
• Determine level or degree of change within the subareas; how much each subarea is
moving away form the intent of the RH-2 zone district. Where should density be
increasing continually; in what subareas are there long term goals/vision for high density.
Take into consideration area plans, if any, University Hill and Multi-modal Corridor
(North Broadway and Spruce/Pine Street subareas) plans. Are the subareas moving away
from the intent of the RH-2 zone district.
• What is meant by `high density'; how many DU's per acre? In what subareas is this
density envisioned?
• Modify current parking and density calculations to reflect other zone districts, possibly
with overlays or parking permit programs. The current regulations address Goss Grove
and University Hill, however, rezoning in other areas may be relevant to modifying
parking and density regulations, especially Spruce/Pine and North Broadway.
• Current parking requirements are unrealistic for single-family residential.
• The North Broadway and Spruce/Pine Street subareas' development patterns and long
term vision/goals do not reflect the intent of the RH-2 zone district, and should be
considered for rezoning.
• Determine what percent of the RH-2 zone district are rentals vs. owner occupied? Percent
per subarea?
• The Goss Grove subarea is an area of its own with its variety of residential densities,
forms, parking and rentals. Important to keep the character of this area architecturally and
historically.
• Modifications to the current regulations should clarify density calculations and
development potential.
There were no conclusions, there was no board consensus, listed above were individual
observations made by some Planning Board members.
There were three themes touched on by board members:
• Promote flexibility especially for single family owners.
• Be specific and deliberate in our desire for stability vs. change.
• There was general support of the staff memo and the next steps identified. More analysis
is needed. Generally observed that Univerity Hill and Goss Grove are different than the
other two zone districts. Rezoning might be more appropriate in those other two areas.
The way the zone is currently set up, it would not allow for change at all particularly in
the smaller lot sizes.
3
6. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR,
AND CITY ATTORNEY
J. Johnston updated the board on the Compatible Development Project.
E. Jones thanked P. Shull for his service to the city.
R. McHeyser discussed the board retreat.
W. Johnson agreed to Chair the board meetings on April 2 and April 16.
R. McHeyser and S. Richstone updated the board on the council discussion on the
Boulder Transit Village site.
7. DEBRIEF/AGENDA CHECK
8. ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board adjourned the meeting at 8:51 p.m.
APPROVE B
i
Board it
DAT
4